UK to stay in Common Transit Convention

The government announced this means “simplified cross border trade for UK businesses exporting their goods”. “It will provide cashflow benefits to traders and aid trade flow at key points of entry …….. traders will only have to make customs declarations and pay import duties when they arrive at their final destination.” How about some apologies from all those who said border friction would b e very damaging?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Fedupsoutherner
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    Great news John. One by one the cliff edge myths will be decimated.

    • Merlin
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:51 am | Permalink


      But I have yet to have a good answer to the fact that you cannot argue you are respecting the will of the British people when you are forcing No Deal which has about 25%-35% of the British people supporting it over something that has 48% of the British people supporting it.

      Indeed the only answers I seem to get are abuse or yar boo sucks, you lost. Fair enough of course, but it’s not going to get us anywhere.

      • eeyore
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 10:10 am | Permalink

        The latest poll I saw has support for No Deal at 61%. It probably depends on the question you ask and who is paying for the survey.

        • Hope
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:11 am | Permalink

          The servitude plan was not mentioned or an option when we voted leave. The only deal mentioned was a trade deal. May has failed to get one, her political declaration is a waste of paper and uninforcible.

          Allowing the EU to hold a gun to the head of negotiators to capitulate further in any trade negotiations is madness and xan only be viewed as a lever for the UK to remain in the EU.

          We voted leave, in a clean break leave, now May must get on with it.

          • Hope
            Posted December 20, 2018 at 4:04 pm | Permalink

            Hammond called Andrea Jenkins a stupid woman at PMQs on 20/07/2018 when she asked May when Brexit changed to mean remain. Quite clear on YouTube and parliament channel.

            Hammond called leave MPs, and by implication 17.4 leave voters, extremists.

            When is May going to sanction him? She makes all the virtual signalling claims but only acts when it suites her. What a fraud.

            Reply I have not seen or heard this myself

        • Merlin
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

          Fantastic news.

          If there is 61% of the British population pro No deal, then we have some form of national unity.

          Where is the survey from (I’m assuming its a national survey, not among newspaper readers)? Mine was conducted by the Economist two weeks ago, in case you are curious.

          • eeyore
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

            Merlin – It was an informal Facebook poll by Martin Lewis of Of 185,000 people asked to choose between a second referendum and No Deal, 61% backed No Deal.

            Not a scientific poll of course, and the question was very specific, but a sample of 185,000 is significant.

          • jerry
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:57 pm | Permalink

            @Merlin; “Where is [this other] survey from (I’m assuming its a national survey, not among newspaper readers)? Mine was conducted by the Economist two weeks ago, in case you are curious.”

            Talk about making an oxymoron out of yourself. 🙁

            First you claimed to have seen (media) reports of 25%-35% support for “No Deal”, since when @eeyore claim’s to have seen (media?) reports of 61% support for “No Deal”, now you suggest that media reports are not sufficient!

            What makes you think the Economist magazine, and other periodicals, do not have editorial lines to draw as good/bad as any newsprint title.

          • Lifelogic
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

            The people once again showing they are so much more sensible than MPs.

            About 98% of MPs voted for Ed Miliband’s bonkers “virtue signalling” climate change act. It is massively job destroying, freezes old people in their homes and is economically (and environmentally) hugely damaging and pushes up energy costs for now reason.

            I cannot imaging the public being so stupid as to vote for something so halfwitted by 98% to 2% or indeed at all.

          • Al
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:08 pm | Permalink

            I believe that’s Martin Lewis’ poll on Facebook. It is hardly scientific, and his following is Remain-skewed as he indicates, but of 185,000 votes the results were 61% no deal to 39% second referendum.

            The summary is here:

          • Edward2
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

            Ah the Economist…a very pro EU publication.

          • Hope
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

            No value in a retrospective survey. The vote was the result. Fact.

            Should we have retrospective analysis on every last election, where would that get us, it would prove nothing.

            Scottish referendum should be up for grabs again by your logic. No specious rot.

          • Butties
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

            Yeah merlin The Economist survey as if that count for anything. Get out on the streets Lad and take a sounding!

      • Know-Dice
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:24 am | Permalink

        Merlin, that’s the way “first past the post” works in this country.

        Parliament could have made the rules different for the Referendum, but they didn’t.

        • Merlin
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

          I agree. But it wasn’t a first the post vote.

          It was a motion of no confidence type vote.

          The government is still allowed to run in the subsequent election even if it loses a confidence vote. We have to find an alternative that has the support of 49% of the British population. I don’t mind what. But we need demonstrable proof if we are to avoid chaos.

          • Narrow Shoulders
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:17 pm | Permalink

            This is a classic non-seqitur being visited upon us by those skilled in strawman arguments.

            We had a vote about this specific issue. The majority (who voted the rest abide by the result) voted to leave. Appeasing 48% who lost does not have to be a consideration.

            The next non sequitur is that we did not know what we were voting for. We voted to leave the clutches of a supranational organisation that imposes rules on us. It was made clear to us that this meant leaving single market and customs union and this may make us worse off but we would still continue to trade albeit with more difficulty.

            We still voted to leave. The arguments happened and a decision was taken.

            It is now only vested interests that are stopping a reasonable agreement being created. If everyone in the UK supported the efforts to leave our negotiating position would be stronger.

          • Edward2
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:28 pm | Permalink

            I presume you mean the chaos of a government trying to refuse the referendum vote by remaining in the EU

        • Merlin
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

          The last point I fully agree with.

          The country got hoodwinked in the first referendum pure and simple.

          The Brexiteers were never asked to put up an alternative. That’s why we’re in this mess now, and that’s why unfortunately we’re going to have to another referendum.

          A general lesson for referendums in future is that we need one defined alternative against another. (And ‘leaving the EU’ is not clearly defined, as we are finding to our cost).

          • David Price
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

            For that matter ‘remaining in the EU’ has not been clearly defined – it never has been defined nor discussed nor agreed by the electorate

          • jerry
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

            @Merlin; The Remain option was never clearly defined either, there were 19 campaigning groups during the referendum who wanted to Remain but with manifestos that ranged from wanting the UK to be a part of a fully Federated EU to Remaining in but renegotiating the UK’s terms of membership to that of a EEA or EFTA membership status.

            By the way, Referendum are a pure FPTP vote, a simple 51% is all that is needed. Remain lost, get over it! 😉

          • Edward2
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

            How can you define the future.

          • Narrow Shoulders
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

            I agree with David below remain was never defined.

            Leave was quite clearly defined but none of the vested interests working against leaving would allow someone who believed in leaving to be in charge of it.

            For that we can blame the majority Europhile Conservative party.

          • Narrow Shoulders
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

            David above

      • gyges01
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

        All the people who entered the referendum wanted the wishes of the results of the referendum to be respected whether leave or remain. The wish of the people is to leave. The democratic mandate comes from all 34million people …

      • libertarian
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:07 pm | Permalink


        I gave you a full list of why your spurious claims with regard to the Remain vote are total nonsense . AFTER enacting the democratic will of the people we LEAVE then negotiate deals

        IF we had voted Remain we would have stayed and negotiated further integration, EU military, Euro, bringing in more member countries etc.

        Sorry unless you are completely and totally dumb ( or a rabid remainer) LEAVE is a perfectly straightforward and understood choice.

        What you do AFTER you left is a completely different matter

        The rules of the institution to which you wish to belong make that abundantly clear

        • Merlin
          Posted December 20, 2018 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

          I’m sorry to have offended you.

          I guess I must be completely and totally dumb then.

          My apologies for my stupidity.

          • libertarian
            Posted December 20, 2018 at 8:44 pm | Permalink


            No problem mate. It happens when you accuse people of not knowing what they voted for when in fact they did .

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:50 am | Permalink

      Certainly great news for the Irish.

      From the Irish Times, November 9th 2018

      “Food sector to be ‘adversely affected’ by Brexit impact on UK ‘landbridge’”

      “Report: economy ‘significantly reliant’ on critical route and would be hit by any deterioration in transit times and increased costs”

      So Theresa May will oblige Leo Varadkar by making sure that the UK ‘landbridge’ from Ireland to the continent will not be materially affected by our departure from the EU, and in return Leo Varadkar will oblige Theresa May by insisting that even after we have left we must remain under the economic rule of the EU – which is what Theresa May really wants, because that is what she has secretly promised to some of those parts of UK-based big business which have got themselves deeply involved in trade with the rest of the EU.

      About 6% of UK businesses exporting 12% of GDP, and the 0.1% of GDP which is driven across the border into the Republic is her pretext for keeping 100% of our economy where she wants it, still under the economic thumb of the EU.

    • Richard
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

      Nick de Bois on ConHome today:
      “During my stint as Chief of Staff to Raab, I was enthused by the considerable No Deal planning work undertaken by the Department for Exiting the European Union under instruction from ministers. … Nevertheless, whilst the planning for No Deal continues on this side of the channel, it remains at risk of not being ready in time for our exit from the EU simply because Number 10 has been too cautious to embrace the plans by putting the full weight of government resources behind them to ensure successful implementation. That should change now – and yesterday’s announcement that the cabinet should “ramp up “ preparations is frankly not enough. … Parliament voted for it and now the Government should get ready for it. They have the tools in place; all they need is conviction.”
      Lots more there:

    • Richard
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

      “Ministers claim that the Treasury is ‘taking months’ to sign off on crucial projects despite just 100 days to go until we leave the EU … The Cabinet minister fumed to The Sun: “The one Government department doing the most to stop no deal is the Treasury, so it is incredible for them to now criticise anyone else. All the delays in getting money come directly from him.”
      Another livid minister in a different ministry added: “Even when the budgets are allocated, it still needs to be released through business cases approved by the Treasury, and that’s when the Treasury tries to restrict it. We are doing full business cases and they still don’t yet have them cleared. It is quite extraordinary”.

  2. Turboterrier
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    Apologise? They never will, they are too aarogrant and blinkered to do that.
    Bad losers are all the same, everybody to blame but themselves.

    • Iain Moore
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:12 am | Permalink

      Nor will they be asked to apologise, for the media hasn’t reported it. Odd that considering the wall to wall coverage they have given to all the problems they claim Brexit will cause us.

    • Merlin
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:54 am | Permalink

      Happy to apologise.

      If and when we actually leave.

      Oh … and this Project Fear thing. I believe the pound went down the toilet, and wiped 20% off the U.K economy in dollar terms. But I suppose that’s fine then.

      Reply Try checking your figures – you are wrong again

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 10:12 am | Permalink

        Merlin. When the head of Heathrow tells you there is not need to worry about flights and its ok to book your holidays why is the BBC still reporting that its dodgy to book a holiday next year? When will all this nonsense stop? The EU would fall flat on its face without our tourists. Perhaps that would be a good reason not to go on holiday!! Done in one.

        • Merlin
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

          It’s not the flights I worry about.

          It’s the fact we are part of Europe. We cannot compete against Vietnam when it comes to trading with China, nor Mexico when it comes to trading with the US.

          There are many things we can change, geography isn’t one of them.

          • libertarian
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:27 pm | Permalink


            You are wrong again

            The UK is the biggest single investor in the USA, the USA is the single biggest investor in the UK . More than 1 million Americans work for British companies .

            Er Vietnam sold £17 billion of exports to China last year. The UK sold £22.3 billion

            86% EIGHT SIX percent of our economy is in SERVICES . Geography has no part what so ever to play in services. Its easier to do business in Australia, Canada and New Zealand than it is in Calais, Bruges or The Hague .

            Maybe there ought to be a test of voters to see if they know the first thing about trade and business before being allowed to vote on those topics

          • Edward2
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

            In or out we compete with other nations in the world.

          • Jagman84
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:25 pm | Permalink

            All that Brexit amounts to is that we wish to bring the management of our country back in-house. As opposed to sub-contracting it to unelected bureaucrats, like we have done since the EU was formed from the EEC/EC. It’s about who has the final say on matters that affect us all and the having the ability to remove our representatives if they fail us. You still have time to remain a slave of the EU by moving to the European mainland, if you so wish.

          • Merlin
            Posted December 20, 2018 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

            Libertarian. I can’t actually believe you are disputing geography is relevant to trade.


            You didn’t correct for the size of the country, so using your own figures, approximately
            7.6% of Vietnam’s GDP came from trade with China
            0.7% of UK’s GDP came from trade with China
            But thank you for illustrating my point.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

          The BBC is stuffed full of second rate misguided art graduate lefty remainers suffering from idiotic group think on Brexit, Magic Money tree economics, ever bigger government and on the Climate Alarmist C02 religion.

          Wrong on every issue. It will only stop when they cull the unfairly funded (by the licence TV tax) organisation and fire these over paid dopes.

        • Steve
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

          Fed Up

          “The EU would fall flat on its face without our tourists.”

          Indeed so. I imagine Greece and other countries who’s prime industry is tourism might suffer. On the bright side at least that would further propagate the cracks.

        • margaret howard
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 4:13 pm | Permalink


          ” The EU would fall flat on its face without our tourists.”

          Really? So does that apply to us without EU tourists?

          • Edward2
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

            Correct, that is why a mutually satisfactory arrangement can be developed.
            Good to see you starting to realise that European nations want to carry on trading with us.

          • Fedupsoutherner
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:23 pm | Permalink

            Margaret. We, the UK, are not trying to stop tourists coming. Wake up.

          • Jagman84
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:28 pm | Permalink

            Not particularly. London is by far the biggest draw for tourism, especially with Paris in flames on a nightly basis.

          • libertarian
            Posted December 20, 2018 at 10:13 am | Permalink


            Yup, thats why the UK as far as I know doesn’t propose charging tourists to come here. Unlike the cut off your nose to spite your face EU

          • margaret howard
            Posted December 20, 2018 at 12:07 pm | Permalink


            ” London is by far the biggest draw for tourism”

            I’m afraid not. France and Spain get more than double our numbers and Italy 20m more. We are in 7th place, just ahead of Turkey.

            Your claim that Paris is ‘in flames on a nightly basis’ is just a joke.

          • libertarian
            Posted December 20, 2018 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

            Margaret Howard

            “London is the leading European city for tourism and has topped the MasterCard Global Destination Cities Index for five out of the last eight years”

            Last year 19.8 million tourists visited London

            True that whole countries such as France and Spain get more tourists but he specifically said London and he is correct

        • Know-Dice
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

          FUS, Today the EU graciously will allow UK flights to over-fly and land in EU Land (for a limited period)after we exit the EU, which is strange seeing as over flying rights are part of the “Chicago Convention” and not an EU competency…may be we [the UK] will allow Ryan Air to land in the UK for a time limited period…

        • libertarian
          Posted December 21, 2018 at 11:05 am | Permalink


          Yeh really, I do dispute that geography is relevent to trade . Based on the fact that I own 10 businesses and I trade all over the world, not so much in EU though. I also own a business in SW France, Spain is not a customer but the USA, UK, Australia and NZ are. Hmm Geography

          It was you who used Vietnam as an example not me.

          As I’ve already pointed out but you continue to ignore 86 EIGHTY SIX % of economic activity is services and services are NOT geographically based . Its why the USA is our biggest market and not France . Do you see now?

          • libertarian
            Posted December 21, 2018 at 11:10 am | Permalink


            Merlin , if you had ever run a business you would also know that different products and services work in different markets . Therefore a lot of service businesses work best where the language and culture are compatible.

            Your argument for proximity is undone by your own experiences unless you seriously would buy a car based on the fact that its the nearest dealership to where you live.

      • Newmania
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

        8.6.15 $1.56,
        17.1016 $1.22
        …about 22%
        Yup those figures do need checking . While we are talking stats isn`t it amazing that your platform for inflicting the misery of Brexit on us is an electorate of whom 56.6% voted for remain.

        • Edward2
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

          Where do you get 56.6% from?
          In the last election over 80% voted for parties promising to Leave

        • Original Richard
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

          So what ?

          In 1985, whilst we were in the EU, it went to $1.04 to the pound.

      • Merlin
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

        Quite true. I was making a general point. The pound has only fallen 12% in Euro terms and 5% in dollar terms so I guess I should rejoice.

        But I’ll give you another. The UK had the third-slowest GDP growth rate in the EU in July to September 2017. We were the fast growing country in the G7 before this referendum. The employment numbers are good, but not much use if the country’s not growing. Oh wait … and we haven’t even left yet.

        • Edward2
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:32 pm | Permalink

          I note you quote figures for over a year ago.
          Recent figures show UK growth continuing and Germany and France reducing their growth figures.

        • Jagman84
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:38 pm | Permalink

          Are you sure that you are not Dominic Grieve? He was spouting similar bogus statistics on Talk Radio recently. As a certain Mr Juncker once said, “When it becomes serious, you have to lie.” Your arguments fail on democracy and now on economics. You and your acolytes are a busted flush. No wonder you want a bad losers vote. It would hang on you well.

      • Merlin
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

        I was horrified by my inaccuracy, so I checked the figures

        1.42 Euros to pound before referendum
        1.11 Euros today

        So 22% fall. Thank you for correcting me. (Though I was well off on dollars. Didn’t realise how the dollar has tanked, so only 5% fall, Happy to admit I’m wrong on dollars, if you’ll admit you were wrong on Euros).

        Reply I did not comment on Euro

        • Edward2
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

          During our years in the EU the pound has moved from parity to near 1.70 versus the euro and from near parity to over 170 against the dollar.
          Any movement now and you blame Brexit.
          What caused these huge movements in pre referendum years?

        • L Jones
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

          I don’t think it’s worth replying, Dr Redwood. These people actually WANT to be gleeful about any suffering they might imagine the UK would endure.
          It’s base, mean and shameless on their part. But they are remainders. And that is the way their minds work.

          • Merlin
            Posted December 20, 2018 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

            I take no pleasure in Britain suffering. I’m sure you don’t either.

            Indeed, the only reason I’m making this argument is because I don’t want it to suffer.

            Also this ‘Remainer’, ‘Brexiteer’ thing may be a bit old hat. I believe we now have Remainers, No Dealer, Managed No Dealers, Canada Plusers, and Government supporters.

        • Merlin
          Posted December 20, 2018 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

          Just to be clear.

          If Brexit happens and 49% of the British people support an alternative, I am absolutely behind making this work. I want the best for this country, and I will put my prejudices aside to make Brexit work.

          Equally, I am sure if we end up with Remain, everyone here will put aside their prejudices, and make it work as best they can.

          We all want the best for this country and are arguing furiously because we care and believe in Britain. And when the time comes to unite, I know we will.

          • Edward2
            Posted December 20, 2018 at 11:27 pm | Permalink

            How lovely you are.

  3. Javelin
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    The legal text of the CTC says it will come into effect two whole months after being enacted.

    Which means the 1st of March.

    The fisheries policy is being debated today – which the legal text says requires 3 months to remove fishing vessels off the EU list of approved fishing vessels.

    The UK Gov has trawled (excuse the pun) EU legislation for exit timings and is now executing that plan.

    In other words the UK is implementing a smooth transition to a No deal.

    This needs to be made clear to all those voting in January.

  4. Gary C
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    Clarification on this issue is very welcome, thank you.

    I wouldn’t waste any time waiting for apologies though, if any of the remainer fear mongers do have the courage to come forward and admit they are wrong it should not be taken as sincere.

  5. Javelin
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:30 am | Permalink

    Your last post made some important points, which made me realise an argument that is sufficent to trump any argument that the Remoaners might make.

    Anything other than No Deal or Remain requires UK or EU Parliaments to pass additional laws. No referendum could guarantee such additions. In otherwords there could be no other realistic interpretation other than No Deal or Remain – that is why Brexit means leave with No Deal.

    • SecretPeople
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

      Well argued.

  6. Mike Stallard
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:43 am | Permalink

    This is getting like a game where people prove things. I am trying not to do that.
    AEOs will still have problems exporting to Eire and Europe though won’t they? The lorries are all sealed for that reads as 140,000 of them pass through on UK roads to Europe.

    • Edward2
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

      Tell us why there will be a big problems.

    • jerry
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 10:44 pm | Permalink

      @Mike Stallard; CTC, is that not just an EU re-branding the UN’s TIR convention? If so this has been around in one shape or another since the late 1940s, and was the customs convention used by both the UK and Eire before either joined the EEC.

  7. Lifelogic
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    Border friction is caused by governments. If they do not want trade friction (which is in no one’s interests) then we do not need to have it.

    If the EU want to deliberately cause difficulties they clearly can do this, but it is not in their interests to do so. We can always find ways to encourage them to behave more sensibly where needed.

    In the end they will act in their own interests which would be just fine.

    • Richard1
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:06 am | Permalink

      This point is rarely made. Trade happens because individuals and companies wish to conduct it. What governments do is decide whether they want to get in the way. If there is a cliff edge at Clean WTO Brexit it will be because the EU has decided to invoke the full panoply of its getting-in-the-way regulatory structure to frustrate buyers and sellers of goods and services between the UK & the EU from carrying on trade as they wish. There will be no actual grounds on, eg health & safety etc, for doing so. Could be quite a revealing moment.

      • Kim Dole
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 10:48 am | Permalink

        WTO rules REQUIRE the EU to apply its full panoply of rules to the UK. That is the basic WTO rule of nondiscrimination

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:02 pm | Permalink

          Chapter and verse, please … not stuff that you’ve just made up.

        • ian wragg
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

          please forward a link to back up your assertions or I suggest you read Denis Coopers replies which are thoroughly researched.
          There is no need for a cliff edge as WTO allows time for transition which makes this unnecessary.

          • ian wragg
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

            btw, I have booked a holiday from 22nd March to 11th April and paid in full.

        • Richard1
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

          You are wrong. The WTO allows continuation of tariff free trade for at least ten years pending an FTA. Since by definition all UK exports currently meet EU standards exactly, there is no justification for impeding flow, carrying out inspections etc. It will be purely a matter of political choice to do so. Look it up.

          • acorn
            Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

            WTO Article 24 would need a schedule of actions registered by the two or more parties concerned in building an FTA. As this would be effectively trying to operate Art 24 backwards; for the first time ever, the WTO would require a comprehensive and target/stage dated schedule lodged at the start. The EU27 are never going to agree to that because they have no need to.

            BTW. There is a bit of WTO Art 24 in the Withdrawal Agreement. Northern Ireland would have stayed in the EU under its “Frontier Territory” provision. The backstop being Northern Ireland AND Great Britain being in a somewhat larger WTO, Art 24″Frontier Teritory”.

        • Mark
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

          We already apply them – usually in gold-plated versions.

        • jerry
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

          @Kim Dole; Indeed, but not just to the UK, they will have to apply their “full panoply of rules” to all the other RotW trading nations, unless there is another EU-Third Country agreement in force, if they wish to stay the correct side of the WTO rules.

          The EU have very few full or even partial Third Country trade agreements enacted, I very much doubt the EU will wish to make trade difficult with China, the USA or Australia (for example) just to spite the UK!

        • Dennis
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

          “WTO rules REQUIRE the EU to apply its full panoply of rules to the UK. That is the basic WTO rule of nondiscrimination”

          I wish this was explained. Why only the EU rules must be applied – it’s only one of many countries. Why don’t the UK rules or any other county’s have to be applied to the EU? – non discrimination!

        • Chris
          Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

          Really, Dennis? Evidence please.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:53 pm | Permalink


      • libertarian
        Posted December 20, 2018 at 10:16 am | Permalink



        Exactly what happened with the EU’s bonkers VATMOSS . 300,000 businesses just stopped selling to EU based customers and moved their business elsewhere

  8. majorfrustration
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    Still masses of negative comment coming out of the BBC – this needs to be addressed by Leading Brexiteers. Senior Brexiteers need to go head to head with the BBC. This blog altho good will not be sufficient to crack the problem

    • jerry
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:07 am | Permalink

      majorfrustration; “Still masses of negative comment coming out of the BBC UK MSM

      There, corrected that for you…

    • Richard1
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:07 am | Permalink

      You rarely hear “extremists” on the BBC.

  9. Toffeeboy
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:52 am | Permalink

    I think you’ll find it’s down to the EU to determine what happens at THEIR borders. They have limited interest in facilitating UK exports as they want to encourage firms based here to relocate, as they made clear yesterday. And why shouldn’t they, given that so many international firms were only ever here to take advantage of our membership of the single market in the first place? And I don’t think you’ll find recourse to the WTO will help much. You’ll soon be having to square up with your constituents to explain why you told them all such a pack of bare-faced lies.

    • jerry
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:19 am | Permalink

      @Toffeeboy; If the EU do as you suggest, outside of EU rules, the UK can make it difficult for the EU27 to trade into the UK, without actually restricting trade. UK businesses will be free to source from outside of the EU27, for example that RHD car headlight which currently comes from a EU27 factory complete with a CE mark could easily instead come from a factory in Detroit or especially Tokyo as it would no longer needs a CE mark.

      The EU will not take such a risk, as it would be an act of self harming spite to do so.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:29 am | Permalink

      You don’t know much about borders do you ?

      What happens at the borders is determined by existing WTO rules. This means the EU have to impose the same border arrangements for all other countries they trade with, if they impose obstructive rules on UK imports they’d have to do the same for USA imports – they wouldn’t dare.

    • JimS
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:34 am | Permalink

      They have had forty years of ‘limited interest in facilitating UK exports’ and have done quite well in that respect.
      If international firms only came here to take advantage of the single market why didn’t they go the whole way and locate in central EU?
      One export that the EU did facilitate was the export of Ford van production to Turkey!

    • Edward2
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 10:00 am | Permalink

      Hilarious you think companies only come to the UK because we are in the fabled single market.
      Government stability, contract law, good transport network with ports airports and motorways, a huge and wealthy UK market, a good available skilled workforce, excellent clusters of good quality suppliers, support from government in terms of state aid and grants for relocation and R and D.
      The list goes on.

      • Jagman84
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

        Indeed. They chose us, for the absence of EU regulations that we are opted out of. May’s rotten deal risks the imposition of such stifling nonsense. The real intention is to subdue the UK population, before dragging us into a United States of Europe. It cannot work with the UK outside.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

      So, overall, what economic benefit has the Single Market brought to the UK?

      In 2012 Michel Barnier said that the creation of the Single Market had added about 2% to the collective GDP of the EU member states, but at about the same time a German study said for the UK it was below that average at about 1%, while a 2017 study for the German government said that if the UK left the EU Single Market and defaulted to WTO terms then it could have a reduction in economic growth over the long term equivalent to a loss of 1.7% of GDP … this is all before taking into account the costs of membership of the EU and of its Single Market, but just taking these gross figures these are no more than marginal impacts given that the long term trend growth rate of the UK economy is 2.5% a year.

    • TL
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:42 pm | Permalink


      But isn’t that a Trump’s policy? Don’t you think the EU is better than that?

  10. Alan Jutson
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:57 am | Permalink

    Apologies, that would be admitting they were wrong in the first place JR.

    Very few politicians apologise, unless it was something the Country did when they were not in Parliament.

    The closest you get is, lessons will be learn’t

    • Gary C
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:23 am | Permalink

      “The closest you get is, lessons will be learn’t”

      Don’t forget . . . . ‘We have listened’

  11. Maybot
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    How about apologies for everything else too ?

    The age hatred, the class hatred… the ‘stupidity’ hatred.

    A Remainer mate contacted me by email yesterday to point out a study that had found Brexit voters to be of lower IQ than Remain voters. I responded thus,

    “What nasty person instigates such research because people vote in a way they disliked ? What next ? Eugenics ???”

    I have been disturbed by Andy and Newmania’s contributions to this site. etc ed

    Euthanasia for old people, disenfranchisement for the working class !

    • sm
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:07 pm | Permalink

      I believe this theory is based on research showing that generally, older people (presumably those over 50 or so) were less likely to be university graduates than millenials.

      What is seldom pointed out however is that generally there was a far lower percentage of school leavers with the opportunity of going to university prior to Blair’s expansion. To extrapolate from that a claim that Leavers have a lower IQ is sheer twaddle.

    • libertarian
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:24 pm | Permalink


      Odd isnt it Andy and the Remain troll army on here tells us almost daily

      Only old dying people voted leave

      The mega rich voted leave

      Leavers are thick and stupid ( but rich !)

      So either 17.4 million old, dead, thick billionaires voted leave or as I suspect they are just the ramblings and rantings of a bunch of losers with no idea about the real world

  12. Nicholas Murphy
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    They won’t apologise, Mr Redwood. Their hatred for the British people, their unquestioning love for the supra-national power that is the EU, and their complete lack of shame prevents them.

  13. a-tracy
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:16 am | Permalink

    What was all that about on Channel 4 news last night then? This needs correcting by them, they are misleading the public. However, I do think we need to look at this aspect of customs clearance, why were we clearing goods not originating in the UK to go to Switzerland taking an hour to do it, how did it get in the UK uncleared and unchecked?

    • Dennis
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

      Yes that cH 4 news last night was amazing. one foot high paperwork for one truck (3% of the total from outside the EU) which will apply to every truck from the EU as well. The customs checker confirmed this will be the case with WTO rules and all customs officers agree that it will be unworkable and chaos and….

      And on Ch 4 news last Friday Elia Ibrahimi said that UK exporters will face tariffs of 90% for beef, 10% for cars. Another said 62% for lamb.

      Any reality is this lot?

      • Atrebates
        Posted December 20, 2018 at 12:36 am | Permalink

        The statements about tariffs are incorrect. WTO tariffs applied in the EU to non-EU exporting country products (where these countries have Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status) for meat and edible offals averaged 5.1% in 2018. For some specific meat products the tariff might be higher, but the highest possible is 15.4%. For many meat products the tariff is zero.

        To check these figures for yourself, go here:

        • Atrebates
          Posted December 20, 2018 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

          Apologies to all, I have misreported the WTO tariff situation for future UK-EU trade somewhat. Being tired when researching these technical issues doesn’t help. I reported WTO tariffs on food products imported from countrues with Most Favoured Nation status, but I only reported the Ad Valorem (AV) tariffs (i.e. tariffs applied as a percent increase to the money value of the goods). There are also some non-AV tariffs and these do make quite a difference to the total tariff rate. A good place to look to see the potential impact of application of WTO tariffs on food products between the UK and EU would be a study conducted by Civitas:

          This puts the total average tariff payable on meat products (i.e. exports to the EU and imports from the EU to the UK, at about 32% and dairy products at around 40%. These are, however, at the top end of the tariff ranges for all foods.
          However, there are a few points to note. First, we are much more self sufficient in dairy and meat products than we are in fruit and veg for example (around 80% of UK meat and dairy demand is met from UK supply). Second, we already import food products from around the world on WTO tariff rates and these come to our shores at competitive prices. The food sector could counter the imposition of tariffs on foods coming from the EU by switching to non-EU suppliers – our supermarkets are superb at international sourcing. Third, UK farming can increase output. Although UK self sufficiency has been slowly declining in recent years, this trend can be reveresed with improvements in market price and policies more supportive to productivity improvements. In some sectors output increases might take a little while, but for sectors like poultry and pigs, where there are short animal life-cycles, major increases in output could be achieved within a year. Fourth, when we are able to sign our own trade deals we can source even cheaper food from non-EU countries to counter higher prices of food sourced from the EU (indeed, in these circumstances we would probably need to support the incomes of our own farmers in some some sectors because these imports would undercut their break-even price). And finally, the EU will not stand by and watch their food exports to the UK wither to nothing, so they will pursue a trade agreement with us to remove those WTO tariffs and allow them to export to us on equal terms with non-EU countries that we have trade agreements with.
          Hope this helps.

  14. Gordon Riby
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:20 am | Permalink

    There won’t be any apologies, only more prophesies of doom.

  15. They Work for Us?
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    Thank you Dr Redwood for your clear exposition in the three posts made (so far) today. A WTO Brexit is looking good and let us hope the cabinet have the courage to do it.

    Does the common transit convention bind us into being a free “land bridge” for Irish goods going to the EU with resultant unecessary wear and tear and congestion on UK roads. The Severn crossings are now even free. Do we charge the Irish for this facility or is it all take and no give Mr Varadkar? Presumably very few UK hauliers use Ireland as a land bridge to other destinations and UK hauliers can’t use continental roads like French motorways free of charge?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:27 am | Permalink

      TWfU, I believe you may have put your finger on it here, unfortunately.

      Our government is agreeing to this more for the benefit of the Irish Republic, which treats the UK as its ‘landbridge’ to the continent, rather than for our benefit.

      As I commented at some length back in early November, here:

      “It seems a bit odd to me that despite being arrogant Brits I don’t think we would usually dismiss our neighbour France as just a useful ‘landbridge’ to Italy, say; and I don’t think we would say that this ‘landbridge’ which is of strategic importance for major sectors of our economy “uses French roads and ports” … ”

      So if we are correct the UK government has agreed to this primarily for the benefit of the Irish Republic, and what is the Irish government giving us in return?

      What the Irish government is giving us is this: the demand, backed up not only by the open threat that they will use their veto over new treaties between the EU and the UK, but also by the implied threat of a return to terrorist violence, that the UK must remain under all or many of the rules of the EU Customs Union and the EU Single Market in perpetuity.

      And if not through the ‘backstop’ itself then through another agreement coming into operation which makes it unnecessary for the ‘backstop’ itself to ever come into operation, or through another agreement superseding the ‘backstop’ after it had come into operation.

      When are some of the MPs opposed to Theresa May’s ‘deal’ going to suss this out and begin to say it openly and loudly, that even if the ‘backstop’ itself is intended to be ‘temporary’ the Irish government will insist that the legal fetters it would place upon the UK must be permanent, through one document or another?

    • JustGetOnWithBrexit
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

      Good question.

      Add to the wear and tear and congestion, the tons of CO2 and diesel particulates the UK suffers. What is the cost of that in terms of health and NHS costs.

      In view of this appalling blight on the UK environment…I’m surprised (sarc on)…that Caroline Lucas isn’t a supporter of No Deal (sarc off).

      • Cerberus
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

        Clock them and out of the country and charge them a flat fee for each mile of road used. £2 per mile seems reasonable.

    • Steve
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

      They work for us

      “Does the common transit convention bind us into being a free “land bridge” for Irish goods going to the EU with resultant unecessary wear and tear and congestion on UK roads. The Severn crossings are now even free. Do we charge the Irish for this facility or is it all take and no give Mr Varadkar?”

      You can bet your life Ireland wants a free crossing. I don’t think we should give it.

      As I recall Varadkar tried to stuff us over while hiding behind the EU’s coat tails. We should not forget this, and once we are out we should refuse to recognise Irish sovereignty and deal with Ireland as part of the EU. Northern offshore Europe -call it what you like, they were happy to see our sovereignty compromised so we shouldn’t recognise theirs. They might also wish to repay the massive loan our country recently provided them.

    • Original Richard
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

      BBC South-East today reported that 241,000 HGV drivers in the last 12 months failed to pay the Dartford Crossing Charge.

      Two thirds, or 154,000, were foreign registered, about 20% of the total number of foreign HGV vehicles making the crossing.

      How is this allowed ?

      They cannot all be first and once only offenders ?

      Surely the second time an offender attempts to make a crossing the offender can be caught using ANPR cameras?

      Or don’t the Government care ?

  16. rose
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:46 am | Permalink

    Yes, how about apologies all around the media and political class, but we aren’t going to get them. Instead they are ramping up their Project Fear part 2, with Sky for example, making the most outrageous statements about impending danger and destruction at regular intervals. Isn’t there a law against alarming people in advertisements? Because advertising is what it is, not news.

  17. Adam
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    Govt exists to raise money for spending & to maintain good behaviour. Simple actions to achieve such purposes should be instinctive & routine.

    Those who make crazy predictions reveal their worthlessness. Their regretful acknowledgement of doing wrong via an apology adds no value. They have discredited themselves, & observers know that whatever emanates from a worthless source remains appropriately-ignored.

  18. Kenneth
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    This is big news but the BBC has ignored it, favouring instead Remain propaganda from some companies warning about the effect of a “no deal”.

    Yet again, this scare story has no detail. We are not told what the actual problem is!

    The BBC really is pathetic

  19. Connie
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    Well yes, as long as we do deals, we will be fine. So you have abandoned your no deal fantasy, have you?

    • Steve
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

      No deal is not a fantasy.

      If we fail to leave without a deal and remain shackled to the ungrateful EU there is going to be serious trouble in this country.

  20. Bob
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:12 am | Permalink

    Shocking news about Nick Boles on
    Do his constituents have the right of recall?

  21. LucasH
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    Yes we know that the UK government might announce a well intentioned policy for import and export of goods, but it will take two to agree on policy so that it is freeflow through Europe, and so that we can maintain JIT. But as we are not going to have a transition period anyway I can’t see how freeflow will work

    Also as we can see our politicians are already splintered in their approach to everything at this time, which doesn’t look good for future , instead what we see is more like a recipe for chaos

    Reply This is an agreement with the EU and means JIT will work fine

    • Newmania
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

      You told us JIT would work anyway … so you are making it up . Its better but it still adds costs , adds fiscal costs and regulatory checks must still be in place . there is nothing new here , the delays will just be less visible.

      • Steve
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:49 pm | Permalink


        You have such a positive and patriotic attitude, I don’t know what our country would do without you.

        It’s reassuring to know that while the majority who won the referendum are grafting hard to rebuild the country, you will be doing your bit with your expert and well informed sentiment.

      • libertarian
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:31 pm | Permalink


        If you knew what JIT actually is then you would know it would work under any circumstances anywhere thats the whole point of JIT …

      • Edward2
        Posted December 19, 2018 at 9:37 pm | Permalink

        These are just your predictions NM
        JIT is a complex system of minimal stock holding based on world wide restrictions.
        It is continually modified to take account of any problems.
        If it takes 12 hours extra to import from the EU that will be added to the JIT plan
        Have you ever been involved in world market logistics?

  22. Ron Olden
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    These stories about ‘border friction’, and taxes on trade were all made up from the start by Remainers.

    Neither the EU, nor the UK Government has ever said it had any such intentions.

  23. Tabulazero
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

    So basically the UK’s haulage industry stands to lose cabotage rights inside their biggest market and all you find is to be cheerful about it ?

    • libertarian
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:36 pm | Permalink


      I dont think you know what cabotage rights are. If you did and if you knew that more than 80% of cross channel traffic is from EU haulage companies you would know that its the European hauliers that stand to lose more. You did of course know that you can only do 3 cabotage jobs in any 7 day period as long as its after a UK shipment currently under EU rules..

  24. Iain Gill
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

    I appreciate this is not your “fault”, but you are one of the few MP’s listening.
    This supposed “new” immigration policy just reads like it has been written by the Indian outsourcing movement, and takes no account of the many and varied problems they have caused, and will cause more of if they are allowed to write the rules like this.
    The hype that this is taking back control is nonsense.
    Do I really have to list the many and varied problems about what is going on? Does nobody in the mainstream political parties want to listen to the genuine issues being caused?
    Staggered really that we are being so poorly represented by our political classes.
    Merry Christmas

  25. forthurst
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

    As soon as a read of this policy, I assumed that it drove a coach and horses through the Irish ‘hard’ land border; is that right?

  26. Sue Doughty
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

    Most of the deal is good and will work but the House of Commons cannot approve the backstop parts. This week things have moved on, the UK has sent out papers to businesses to help sort to the No Deal Brexit and the EU has set about implementing the 14 parts of the negotiated deal in order to allow ex-pat Brits to live and work in their countries.
    No need for a transition period and more payments.
    We didn’t need the political arguments other than to hammer out details and make sure Brussels understands we are leaving, deal or no deal.

  27. Denis Cooper
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

    That petition for the UK to leave the EU without a deal in March is now nearing a quarter of a million signatures:

    After three months of pushing it hard at every opportunity Sky News has now got its petition for leaders’ debates to be held at general elections up to about half of that total.

  28. Denis Cooper
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 2:31 pm | Permalink

    Off-topic, JR, there are several proposed amendments here:

    which even if passed could easily be circumvented by the government arranging for the legal effects of the Irish ‘backstop’ protocol to be more or less replicated in one or more new legal agreements, none of which were the Irish ‘backstop’ protocol to which they refer.

    So for example when it was coming up to the end of 2021, and Sir Edward Leigh asked the government what plans there were to remove the Irish ‘backstop’ protocol in conformity with his 2019 amendment, the answer could be that it would shortly be removed because a new agreement with equivalent legal effect would make it superfluous.

    We have to remember all the time that this Tory government under Theresa May is just as much a bunch of cheats as the Labour government under Gordon Brown which denied us a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty on the grounds that Tony Blair’s pledge related to an earlier treaty which had been rejected by the French and the Dutch, the EU Constitutional Treaty, even though the legal contents of the two were so similar.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

      I read this article:

      and wonder why anybody should expect the Irish government to ever agree to a future trade deal which released the UK from the rules of the EU Customs Union and the EU Single Market imposed through the ‘backstop’.

      Would you do that, JR? If you were the Irish Prime Minister and you had got the UK where you wanted it, still subject to more than enough EU law to protect your Irish economy, would you then agree to any new relationship or trade deal under the terms of which the UK would no longer be fettered in that way?

  29. MickN
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

    I caught part of PMQs today. The worrying thing is that I find common ground with a comment by Corbyn.

  30. Charles v
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

    Forgive my ignorance but does the CTC deal with all the potential border checks (e.g. sanitary and phytosanitary checks on agri-food products or with the ability for UK road hauliers to operate in the EU and vice versa)? If no, where will those be dealt with?

  31. Steve
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    I’m reading on the news the EU considers the arrangements strictly time-limited, and will be ended without any consultation with the UK.

    So what they’re saying is; ‘we envisage a right to dishonour any agreements and without the courtesy of warning.’

    Doesn’t that kind of talk just confirm how foolish we would have been to trust the shysters with a Withdrawal Agreement.

    Looking more like leaving without a deal, thank God.

    Though I do think Theresa May should address the nation so everyone is aware the coming no deal scenario was down to the ungrateful EU’s disrespect of the UK and attempts to destroy British sovereignty.

    I also think our contingency plans should include mechanisms to retaliate in the event of any EU nasty tricks.

  32. mancunius
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

    The PM will need watching carefully: she looks suspiciously zealous and uncharacteristically single-minded in her current pursuit of preparation arrangements.
    On past form she might well announce cheerfully in a month’s time that ‘despite her best efforts’ the UK is not prepared for exit and so the government has decided to cancel Brexit or extend Art. 50 for further negotiation.

  33. Anthony New
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 4:23 pm | Permalink

    I keep hearing about the damage Brexit will cause to just-in-time manufacturing (especially in the car industry) but I have to ask if this trade is actually desirable?
    It seems to me that the main effect of the government-subsidised paths for inter-EU JIT trade is to allow international companies to play one country, one workplace, and one subcontractor off against many others and reduce their bargaining power. We consumers are supposed to benefit from this, but we are also workers and taxpayers
    Perhaps we should encourage manufacturers to go back to making a whole car in one country and not creating extra pollution by transporting bits over unnecessary distances?

  34. margaret howard
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

    “Britain faces being overtaken by France and India to slide to 7th-biggest world economy after Brexit, city analysts warn”

    Hurrah for Brexit! Well done Brexiteers!

    • Edward2
      Posted December 19, 2018 at 11:09 pm | Permalink

      I find it unlikely France will overtake the UK considering current political turmoil.
      India is an emerging economy with huge potential and like China is becoming a modern industrial power.
      Nothing to do with Brexit.

    • Steve
      Posted December 20, 2018 at 7:55 am | Permalink

      Margaret Howard

      and you believe that ?

    • libertarian
      Posted December 20, 2018 at 10:36 am | Permalink

      Margaret Howard

      In fact India has now overtaken France , but the UK is still ahead

      The WHOLE point of leaving the EU is because the rest of the world is powering on.

      China, India, Brazil are all growing like mad, the pacific trade partnership when finally agreed will be far bigger than the EU.

      Once the UK leaves the EU , the EU shrinks considerably.

  35. matthu
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

    Express is reporting that Brussels is specifically excluding Gibraltar from any no-deal plans in an apparent attempt at blackmailing the UK government.

    Does this endear them any more to us?

  36. Chris
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 6:31 pm | Permalink

    Really, Dennis? Evidence please.

  37. Billy Elliot
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

    If that is the case why did EU warn what it comes to delays on boarders due to check of livestock as well as customs applications and taxes? It is bit too early for apologies – we are still in EU. But let’s see after year or two

  38. Iain Moore
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 7:35 pm | Permalink

    Sorry off topic, but I think the Javid’s immigration plan is appalling , it’s going to generate more immigration , not less. A removal of the visa cap on skilled migrants is bad enough, but he is going have unlimited unskilled migrants from across the globe, not just the EU, but with the limit that they can only stay for a year. Yeah right, as if we trust the Home Office to manage that one, they can’t even stop people they have deported coming back into the country, what chance they will find these unskilled migrants to remove them, and there is precious little chance they will stop them coming back into the country. Then he is offering foreign University students the right to stay here and work, which allows Universities the chance to flog British citizenship to help them sell their courses, and is looking at the possibility of allowing Asylum seekers to works as well.

    The most obvious immigration plan would have been to have a points based system, but Oh no that isn’t good enough for the Government, they have to construct some Heath Robinson system so bogged down with complexity and loopholes, there will be no effective control of immigration, which is what the British establishment wanted all along.

  39. Lee Taylor
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:09 pm | Permalink

    “Anything other than No Deal or Remain requires UK or EU Parliaments to pass additional laws. No referendum could guarantee such additions. In otherwords there could be no other realistic interpretation other than No Deal or Remain – that is why Brexit means leave with No Deal.”

    This is an excellent point Javellin and you are of course correct, it is a binary choice. Leave (no deal) or Remain (whatever nonsense deal that Mrs. May is attempting to foist on us.)

    It is appalling that only when the EU, after two years of blather, proved to be as despotic as most of us leavers suspected that the May govt. came around to start playing hardball with these fools. We should have left at the outset with the default as WTO and prepared from day one. That would have focused their attention on avoiding the impact. I see now they are scrabbling to try and smooth things out. What I think has failed to sink in with the remain crowd is that there will be no going back. One way or another we are leaving. Things will never go back to their imagined golden age of EU subservience. Even if Mrs. May does succeed in forcing her half baked stay in the EU under a different name it won’t last. The people won’t stay for it.

  40. Original Richard
    Posted December 19, 2018 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    Mrs.May is delaying the Parliamentary vote of her EU Withdrawal Agreement and ramping up the appearance of “no deal” preparations.

    This is to frighten Parliament at the very last minute to into voting for her deal and/or frighten the EU into a last minute amendment to make this Agreement more palatable to Parliament.

    Mrs. May does not want another referendum, not at least one which includes her deal as one of the options, as she knows that during the referendum discourse the general public would wake up to just how bad a deal she has negotiated where Brexit doesn’t ever happen.

    If Parliament remains implacably opposed to Mrs. May’s deal then at least the country will be a free and sovereign nation, will keep its £39bn and business will have the certainty it wants from 29/03/2019.

    If the EU decides to be especially difficult in the days after we leave “pour encourager les autres” it will be the catalyst which finally brings the country together.

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page